Skip to content

Conversation

@mohitjaggi
Copy link

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Sep 17, 2014

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Feb 9, 2015

ok to test

@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Feb 9, 2015

(This would need a JIRA, if it proceeds.) How strong is the need for this? you can always zip several RDDs together directly with several calls. It gets unwieldy with a lot of RDDs, but do you need to do that? you lose type safety in this method. I wonder if, is there a common need to zip an RDD with 2-3 others, we can just add utility overloads for that, that preserve type safety too.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 9, 2015

Test build #27098 has finished for PR 2429 at commit 21bdd19.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@JoshRosen
Copy link
Contributor

@srowen We already have versions of zipPartitions for zipping together up to 4 RDDs.

Is there a common enough use case for this feature that we would want to expose this non-type-safe API?

@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Feb 21, 2015

Ah right, I was looking at zip rather than zipPartitions. Yes the overloads are already there for zipPartitions and I don't see value in adding more. At best, add overloads for zip? but I also wonder about the use case, since you can still achieve this if really needed by calling zipPartitions overloads to make your own zip.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Apr 27, 2015

Do you mind closing this PR?

@mohitjaggi
Copy link
Author

closing on sean's request. i have a workaround.

@mohitjaggi mohitjaggi closed this Apr 27, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants